[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: EDIINT and HIPAA
- To: dick@xxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: EDIINT and HIPAA
- From: ned.freed@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 14:42:44 -0700 (PDT)
- Cc: Rik Drummond <rvd2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, pbyrne@xxxxxxx, Gunther Schadow <gunther@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, ned.freed@xxxxxxxxxxxx, Kepa Zubeldia <Kepa.Zubeldia@xxxxxxxxxxx>, CLEM <clem@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Gary Crough <gcrough@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Beth Morrow <Beth@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "David@Drummondgroup. Com" <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, GISB1@xxxxxxx, ietf-ediint@xxxxxxx, dick@xxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: "Your message dated Fri, 03 Nov 2000 07:58:32 -0600" <>
- List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-ediint/mail-archive/>
- List-id: <ietf-ediint.imc.org>
- List-unsubscribe: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?body=unsubscribe>
- References: <>
- Sender: owner-ietf-ediint@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> I agree, the original AS2 spec was based on AS1, but there were problems
> discovered during AS2 interoperability testing (using RFC 822 (email) style
> packaging) related to "To" and "From" headers, which resulted in the creation
> of two new headers specific to AS2, "AS2-To" and "AS2-From". We (as the authors
> of AS2) will have to provide details of these new routing headers and cannot
> depend entirely on AS1, as we had originally.
> AS1 and AS2 (using RFC 822 (email) packaging) will be VERY similar, but not
> exactly alike. I believe AS2 will have to stand on its own through the IESG
> review process and we'll have to provide "complete" technical specifications in
> AS2 to satisfy IESG requirements.
> Ned, am I correct in this postulation?
Well, sort of. The specification certainly has to be complete -- you cannot
assume that missing bits will be inferred from another specification. However,
you certainly can refer to the other specification rather than repeating the
same words in both.
Do note that normative references create a dependency as far as the standards
process is concerned -- the specification referred to must be at the same
or higher standards level as the one that refers to it.